We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Sunday, January 22. 2017

I know quite a few women who marched, this being the NYC area. Some are good friends whose opinions I respect and value. I know many more who didn't march, whether they sympathized or not. I was ambivalent. Marching isn't something I do, I've never been much of a joiner, even for causes I care about. I don't think marching does anything of value but make the marchers feel better. If that's what they needed, that's fine (the main response I've seen about the march is "I have more faith in humanity now"). I have always found other ways to feel better when issues of the day drag me down.

It is rather interesting to think about some comments I've seen regarding the march. One, in particular, I've seen many times. "You just don't get it, and since you don't, my explaining it won't help you understand, and so you'll never understand." This was said several times to a friend of mine, and despite his request to be enlightened, nobody was willing to do it. I filled him in on the nature of why the women were marching (although I find it a confused message). However, the reaction to him was an indicator of why the Hillary forces lost the election to begin with. In a nutshell, we're all stupid and they don't want to take the time to explain anything - we just have to trust their superior instincts. It's also clear by now the only reason to vote for Hillary was 'she's a woman'. Which wasn't enough of a reason for me, any more than voting for Obama 'because he'll transform race relations' was a reason (given the state of race relations after his transformative role, one can only imagine how awful gender relations may have been after Hillary!).

I had another person say to me, "Your privilege is showing." Privilege is a word which drives me insane. We all have crosses to bear, burdens in life which must be dealt with, and biases to fight. I've seen, and supported the cases of plaintiffs suing for, sexual discrimination. I've also experienced age discrimination. I'm aware of the discrimination which used to take place against my Irish ancestors. Suggesting I have privilege implies I am enjoying the benefits of something I didn't earn. I earn it every day I go to work and deal with the nonsensical idiocy of liberal Progressives who have lost their bearings over this election. Remaining quiet during their diatribes is difficult, but could cost me my job. There's no privilege in political discrimination, and that takes place every day. Still, I'm not marching for laws, or attention, or anything else to protect myself or my rights to believe what I want. My 'privilege' regarding gender ends the minute women start having their conversations which exclude men (see the paragraph above).

All I plan on doing is being the best person I can be. I did that for the last 8 years and it worked out pretty well. The resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. doesn't impact my life as much as I tend to believe. The president is mainly an annoyance. Obama has had the biggest impact of any previous president, thanks to the aggregation of power which has taken place over the years. His mere existence has forced many to find new ways to share thoughts with people. After all, I can't oppose him without being labeled a racist. But more importantly, his impact has shrunk my take home pay as various taxes (not necessarily Federal) have government taking a bigger and bigger chunk of my money for things I don't support. I was told, 8 years ago, "Don't worry, Obama won't be as bad as you think, you'll see how good he is" by every Obama sycophant out there. Yesterday, those sycophants marched because so many of them suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome. I never suffered from Obama Derangement Syndrome, and not because I didn't dislike the guy. As I said, I'm not a marcher or a joiner. I let things play out, and the man pretty much lived down to my expectations.

I don't believe Trump is an improvement, but much like Obama, I'll let things play out. So when the TDS people ask me (as one did) "Give me one good reason to not fear everything this idiot is going to do" I replied "How about taking your advice to me 8 years ago and let's just see what happens?" That should suffice.

Political identity is the least interesting part of anyone's personality. But lately it's become the most important part for many people. I have many liberal Progressive friends, and I feel bad they allow themselves to suffer. But they didn't care when others suffered 8 years ago, so I have a very hard time explaining to them they created the bed upon which they lay. I haven't ended a single friendship over this election, mainly because I don't care if my friends disagree with me. A few have stopped speaking to me, because i "don't care enough." Really? I volunteer my time, I give to charity, I do what I can where I can and when I can. I do these things because I care. I don't want my government to force me to do those things because MY FRIENDS CARE, I want to because I CARE. That is where the major difference between our views. They want to force me to agree with them. I prefer to agree with what I want to agree with, not what they want me to. The Progressive agenda is, if nothing else, a thought and mind control agenda.

The main reason so many marchers yesterday might be upset with me isn't because I don't care about women's rights. I care very much. We just happen to disagree on two things. First, what are the nature of those rights? If you interviewed 200,000 of the marchers, you'd get 200,000 different responses. If I disagree, remember most of the marchers probably disagree, even if only by a matter of degrees. Let's not forget many of these people marching against Trump's sexism and use of power for predatory purposes voted for the sexual predator Bill Clinton and still support him and his wife! The hypocrisy of their position has me wondering what is really important to them? Second, I am not in line with the urgency of the situation. I have seen the workplace change dramatically in 30 years, and most of that change has nothing at all to do with government or laws. It's changed because businesses hire the best people and pay a commensurate wage to experience and background. That may not have been perfectly true 30 years ago, and it will never be perfectly true ever. Ignoring massive improvements does not mean we need to fight harder and get angrier to take the final inch. It means we should acknowledge our gains, consolidate them, and agree to continue to work harder to make things better. Government will never play a role in accomplishing that.

Main reason they refuse to tell you why they're "protesting" (rioting is a better word) is that they don't know why they're "protesting".
They've been told to go out, scream some slogans, and wave some banners that they don't even have to read let alone comprehend.
And they're paid to do so, either in money or in feel-good pets on the head by their favourite celebrity.

those women, and the self-gelded males who joined them, are one of the many faces of libtarded demoncraptia that I'd like to see continue through the next election cycle. most democrats are normal, law-abiding Americans who are disappointed with the election results but are more disgusted by this circus. this is why the party was bitchslapped at all levels of government, state and federal. as long as the DNC won't face this, the party is doomed.

Admittedly I am pretty cynical, being 4th generation Chicago and all, but Hey kids, you ain't seen nothing yet. Remember Wisconsin. Think back to the ordeals of Governor Scott Walker. The "wymen" activists will use the same tactics against the Trump administration, but they will be on steroids.
Who are these people? NEA, AFT, SEIU, and their allies, various and assorted lefty organizations, NGOs, foundations, as well as, anyone else who is dependent on the government trough or relies on government largesse. Noble, nah; self serving, YES.

No, not beer. Maybe when I was 15 years younger. As a joke, I'd say bourbon.

But the reality is alcohol isn't where I choose to feel better anymore. Although a friend of mine did go out drinking to 'drown my sorrows' the night of inauguration. I felt bad that they had this kind of reaction. I, too, went out with friends that night and had a few beers. But only because a friend in a band was playing.

I was just making a wise crack. I don't much care about politics either. I certainly don't drown my sorrows in beer. I was out celebrating a nice afternoon with the wife.

Your line above about political identity being the least interesting thing about people is true.

I have little doubt that my political opinions and thoughts would be found crazy by the young people working in that joint yesterday. Probably by a good portion of the customers too. But we visited with nice people and had a nice couple of hours.

I admire yours and Bulldog's thick skin relating to political issues. I don't feel so insulated. As we stray further and further from the original idea of the USA, politics becomes more and more important. As the government expands, the freedom of the people contracts.

But actually, I'm old enough that I really worry a lot less about politics for myself, but a lot more for my daughter.

It's my opinion that politics matters less and less, even as we're told it matters more.

As important as politics were to me when I was younger, and while I still comment on them from time to time, I'm really more concerned about economics.

We're a nation poorly schooled in economics. The leftists have made sure of this, because ignorance in that field benefits them.

The other reason I find politics increasingly boring is that its the least interesting part of a person's identity. That is, unless it IS their identity. A friend of mine who, 30 years ago, felt I was too political, recently reconnected with me. She was stunned to learn how little I care about politics anymore. Meanwhile, it's her #1 priority.

I laughed, told her it's strange how life changes us, but that her emphasis is misguided. She drove people from her life (she's exceedingly liberal) because they didn't agree with her.

As she and I reconnected and learned how we've changed over the years, she was stunned that see that she disagreed with me on many items, but found my positions were well developed, not aggressive, and rather than reject me as she had so many others, has opened herself up more.

She is slowly changing. I doubt she'll ever give up entirely. But exposure to me allowed her to learn that when you care about people, politics shouldn't matter.

After reading that, I realized one thing. She claims to be a feminist, but made non-feminist choices all along the way. She looks back and regrets not doing things a certain way - which means she chose poorly.

I have one rule in my life. No regrets. I made my choices, I live with them.

That doesn't mean I can't change things later, of course. But I am where I am, and I am who I am because of my choices. I can't feel bad about those choices, nor should I.

If I start to feel that way, then I change myself, not the world around me.

One thing I hope to avoid in the comments is a reverse derangement syndrome. The belief that, somehow, someway, all these marchers are idiots and wrong.

I support 100% their right to march, to speak, to say and act as they please. The fact I have to say this implies just how awful Obama's time has changed things, because his agenda was "If you disagree with me, you are seeking to have laws changed to make things your way." Not at all. I do not disagree with the marchers because I want to see laws changed.....I just disagree and I'm allowed to say that.

More importantly, I believe some make very valid points. There is still considerable gender differentiation and discrimination taking place. Hillary's loss of the presidency was NOT an example of this discrimination or differentiation. She is, was, and will be a criminal. Always.

But these issues do need to be addressed. Just not with laws. Only with awareness and openness to ideas.

I don't hate these people, I know too many of them and like too many of them. Like many groups, there are assholes among them who I can't deal with at all. That's their problem, and they create it, and they love it that way.

But I'm not interested in bashing their march or their reasons for marching. I'm only interested in pointing out they didn't have a clear message, they were considerably more smug and hypocritical than they know, and there's no reason to believe any of us who were ambivalent necessarily oppose them.

We just don't happen to share their values or their urgency. We want to approach things in a more reasonable, open, fashion.

As I, and several others here, have pointed out, there were so many issues which it was about, you couldn't have gotten anyone in the crowd to agree on more than one or two items, let alone agree on a policy which deals with any of those items.

If there is an example of why neither side can find much in common, it is embodied in responses like "you don't understand" and "it was just about abortion."

Yes, I might be partially wrong, but I'm not totally wrong and the hand-made signs prove that pro-abortion was a main topic.

Obviously, most of the women protesting are pro-abortion. As you say, "some pro-life women" marched, and everyone realizes those women were needed for political expediency.

Thank you for letting me express my opinion.

"As I, and several others here, have pointed out, there were so many issues which it was about, you couldn't have gotten anyone in the crowd to agree on more than one or two items, let alone agree on a policy which deals with any of those items."

The main issue was that the Democrats lost the election and a bunch of Democrat women were butt hurt losers. Hope that clears it up.

If there is an example of why neither side can find much in common, it is embodied in responses like "you don't understand" and "it was just about abortion."

Sorry to burst your bubble, but when I've been told for the past 8 years to STFU, then no, there is no common ground. I have sincerely tried to discuss topics on numerous issues with Leftist. It has always come down to the point that I either agree with them or I'm just as Hillary defined; a deplorable.

There is no common ground. And Leftist worship at the altar of Moloch offering their offspring as sacrifice.

I'm not telling you to STFU. I could easily block or delete your comments if I felt that's what I wanted to do. Hell, I even let Zachriel continue to post comments from his mom's basement. I just ignore him now.

But you're just wrong on the issue of abortion as THE theme. An overwhelming number of posters were about global warming. And education. My friends all had signs (and I saw many more) about 'keeping your hands to yourself'. I saw an overwhelming number of anti-Trump signs. So it's not like you're even partially wrong. You're mostly wrong. I agreed that abortion was an issue. It's just not THE issue.

As for political expediency, you really don't know the people I know. You seem to think they were somehow 'invited' to add expediency. I'm not sure how that happens in a grassroots event. They went for other reasons - all of them very different from the themes you noted. Some even voted for Trump, but did so while holding their nose on this issue, and felt this was a good outlet for their opinion.

There is no common ground with the far, extreme, left. Bernie Sanders, etc. No common ground, I agree.

The vast majority of people marching yesterday? There is plenty of common ground, particularly if you're willing to talk to them and share views without preconceived notions. I know many who have shifted their viewpoints after reasonable conversations, mainly because their fundamental points are so weak to begin with, and just having a non-accusatory conversation will help engage them.

Bulldog, I am a very big fan of your blog and am a daily reader. I've obviously hit a sore spot with you concerning abortion.

Perhaps you could tell me what 'keeping your hands to yourself' means. I am definitely willing to hear the other side. Though, through experience I know the other side isn't interested in what I have to say. I certainly would like to keep my hands and my tax dollars to myself, how about you?

I just don't see a singular issue here, and when we discuss issues like this, when we oversimplify, and misconstrue, motives, we alienate the other person in the discussion. Take Meryl Streep, who I wrote about not too long ago. I actually agreed with some of what she said. It wasn't the points she was making which alienated me - it was how she made them, where she made them from, and how she oversimplified the issues which separate our views.

So your comment, which was emphatic in what the march was 'really about' just causes the discussion to break down.

I have a friend who marched who is a local GOP operative. She has 2 daughters. When Trump's hot mike dialogue came to light, she was appalled. She told her girls that nobody has the right to do those things, or even say them.

That is the "keep your hands to yourself" sign she made with them (they are early teens).

I feel that is a good reason to march. I don't have daughters, but if I did, I'd have spent hours having to explain that situation. I found it repulsive.

To be completely fair, and I mention this in the main article, why now? This march was put on primarily by the left to push a variety of leftist agendas. Most voted for Bill Clinton. Bill has done far, far, worse. He has said, far, far worse (after all, he is well known for having said Hillary got more pussy than he did).

Why the urgency now? Trump has not shown a willingness or desire to change laws to hurt women, and has offered women more opportunity through his business than Clinton ever did.

I say this not do defend Trump, who I find personally repugnant. I say it to call out the blatant hypocrisy of the position of the other side.

And that is why their position is so weak, and why in calm, reasoned conversation, I have been able to find many who are willing to admit they simply do not have good reasons to support what they believe, or the way they feel.

Bulldog,
Then I sincerely don't get it. Bill Clinton was getting blow jobs in the WH and that was ok. Donald Trump supported gay marriage before Hillary and Obama. If it's not about power and the right to kill, then I am sincerely asking, what is it about?

Nice piece Bulldog! Here's something for you to think about:
Beautiful women. Women who were blessed at birth with the highest standard of visually approved appearance. The Liz Taylors, the Imams (sp?), the Melanias. Do you understand the kind of abuse they suffer all of their lives? Talk about discriminatory abuse--not from men, but rather from the plain janes. The thousands of dirty never seen little tricks that a beautiful woman must tolerate all of her life! Believe me there is no glass escalator for these gals. No support system pushing her through, over and past the meritocracy criteria. I think perhaps the most isolated and lonely woman in America today is probably Melania!

On the nightly news last night the women's march in Portlan Oregon was the lead. I too was happy to see a complete lack of violence. Good for them. I'm not sure how they pulled it off, whether it was agreed upon or just that the hoodlums took the night off. But make no mistake it is the same far left Marxist/communist groups who back and support these far left groups.

But again thanks for giving the police an easier night then your anarchist buddies did Friday night. But, P.S. would you come back and pick up all the trash you left behind?

Hmm, I think that means "we are marching against Trump. we are marching against those folks who didn't vote for the first woman president." But, they really cannot say that as they realize how whiney it would sound.

I'm a woman and a feminist and I just don't get it. I won't say some of Trump's attitudes toward women don't get up my nose, but it still was a very clear choice for me, and I didn't feel I was somehow letting down my feminist principles. There are lots of reasons to feel iffy about President Trump; I just wouldn't have said that there's a specifically feminist case to be made against him.

The only time I ever marched was in 1961 in Savannah, GA.
I joined the Democrat party in 1959 after being discharged from the Marines. They were just beginning to support "equal rights" and I fell for it. My friends told me that I was supporting a budding Socialist movement but I was too young and too ignorant to understand.
So, in 1961 I walked down Bull street in Savannah with Clarence Mayfield, Hosea Williams and some other people.
I am still a Democrat and when asked why I say: "I hope my party will return to normalcy soon but I don't think it will in my lifetime." God bless President Trump.

I am not the joiner type either. I don't see the point in a lot of these protests. I questioned someone who was going to the women's march yesterday about what they exactly were protesting. She didn't have a clear answer on what was being protested. I don't care if people protest or not, it is within their rights to do so. I'd sooner sit at home and listen to programs like http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas. It was on this program, and I do not recall who the person was, where I heard an interview with someone who studied human rights, etc. he stated that protests for the most part do very little if anything and that if you want to change peoples minds that it will happen by your actions in your everyday life as most people come in contact with thousands of people over their lifetime.

"There is still considerable gender differentiation and discrimination taking place. "
Possibly you can explain gender to me. Now, sex is based on chromosomes and has a physical manifestation as male and female. What is gender based on and what is the physical manifestation?

I can explain "women's rights" to you. It is the right to kill a baby in the womb. Simple as that. That is exactly what they are saying. Everything else they say is pure BS and fake news all intended to stop Trump in favor of a Marxist/socialist agenda, period.

So basically the entire women's movement/march has come down to that: Let me kill babies and I want more free stuff and if you disagree you are a misogynist or something.

I don't know what the "FAR right" is. It seems a very indefinite and all-purpose slur, would-be tyrants of indeterminate motivations and so not loyal and subservient to the leftist ecumenism. Left or Right, they will send all who resist to the arbeit and vernichtung slagers. If the methods are indistinguishable, the pretty words they are cloaked in matter not.

So I don't know why I should care about the right aping the left. If both sides are tyrants, then the middle are the slaves being fought over.

If the 20Cen is an example, the left side seem vastly more willing, able and without scruples to practice extermination as policy.

I have not been successful in having a conversation with leftists. Because if I am told something that does not agree with my so-far experience and learning, I will test it. Testing is now perceived as direct challenge and insult. You are expected to agree, or you are not of the Body and will be reported to Llandru. Heck, I question those who say what I might think, ply them with counter-examples, in the hope that I will learn something new.

I use phrases like "Some people say ..." or "A counter-argument might be ...". The ruse is transparent and ineffective.

I redirect. I say, "It's a free country, do whatever you want, I don't care. Accept the consequences of all your actions. Leave me be, and get your hands outta my pockets. If you want to know what I think and believe, watch what I do." That pretty much reserves my place in the line for the camps, and all the FARs will not shed a tear.

But, I am asked, don't you care about the evil rich? No, I don't. What about the suffering poor? Them neither. Don't you want things to be fair? No, life is not fair, never was, never will be, get over it. Don't you want justice? No, justice is a pretty and decorated cudgel used by slavers. What do you care about? I already told you, watch what I do.

I am for Liberty, with a government whose sole purpose is to secure that Liberty. I am resigned to being in a distinct minority and accepting the Long Defeat. The arc of history bends always to decline, fall, chaos and tyranny. Civilization and Liberty are fragile flowers blooming in a desert valley springtime.

But in terms of our behaviors toward people, we engage behavior and discrimination based on these differences. Often these behaviors are uncalled for (catcalling, groping, etc.), and discrimination is also uncalled for. That is what I meant by differentiation and discrimination.

It's not just about the right to kill an unborn child. It's about respect for all people.

The differentiation and discrimination is far less than it was. It is remarkably different from when I was a child. It is remarkably different from my first job in 1984. But there is still a considerable amount taking place.

The degree to which it is a "problem" is really based on your bias. I know someone who was severely discriminated against when she was younger. As a result, even the littlest things set her off. It's an overreaction, certainly, but to her it's very real.

All their reasons in the linked article are excuses because they are ashamed to admit the real reason. All the groups they represent believe they benifit from governmet. They are now concerned those benifits will be eroded.

No one wants to admit they are not self reliant but are are dependant. Even if they are activly employed in the public sector and are self reliant, they still feel they are dependant on governmet and that their way of life and idealology is under attack.

There's a good bit of truth to that. The person I know best who went to the march is not particularly healthy, and is afraid she'll lose her health insurance with the repeal of Obamacare and the ban on consideration of pre-existing conditions.

Some other were pro-abortion rights and sort of run-of-the-mill feminists who aren't bright enough to understand the flaws in the pay differential issue.

One is such a Clinton fanatic that her marching was essentially a rebuke to anyone who didn't vote for Hillary. Everything else was secondary to her.

Dear Ruralcounsel:
Thank you for your comment. I think you summed it up with the people you described. There are also some that feel that voting for Hillary was mandatory, simply because she was a woman and that not doing so was proof that deep down the country was not ready for a woman president. However, those very same people did not vote for Sarah Palin, because she was a Republican. So even these people have criteria beyond gender, which they require for their vote, but do not think you should have.

Humongous turnout!
As the lone conservative among a group of lady friends, I floated the question, "what is it that the protesters do want? What outcome would answer their protests?" Unclear, kind of anti-Trump's stated policies.
Then a nice long lecture about the benefits of the ACA. And one woman's tale of specifically how Romney-care allowed her to finally feel confident in having health care. However, this particular woman's life choices were all sort of towards less financial remuneration every time, and by extension less contributing to the advancement of the economy.
I don't know.
Our country is so divided.
This lady is my friend, but, as a lib, feels so entitled to read me the riot act on the progressive cause. Bah, humbug. I can't not know their points thanks to the MSM and the entertainment media. But they never here anything but cartoon or vague outline of conservative arguments.

Trump made many unconscionable comments during the primary and election campaigns. The women's march should have sent a clear message to his administration. Will he hear it?

The women's march left 200,000 American kitchens without a woman. Trump should fast track 200,000 pleasant Latina women who are comfortable with their femininity, to legal status. After all, we need immigrant women to be the women that American women don't want to be.

My 75 year old widowed neighbor went on the march. Her some other single gals drove the 150 miles. When I asked her who was there and what were the issues here are some of her responses:

1. I am opposed to Trump
2. I don't want to loose our public lands--that was one of the biggest issues here in MT.
3. I am pro choice
4. A lot of men were there--they seemed to be in two different age groups (1-young men supporting young gal friends or sisters) (2-older guys in retirement afraid of loosing public lands and marching with their wives and granddaughters)
5. "We all had a great time" "Never knew there were so so many Jewish people in MT"
6. Schools--a lot of concern about cutting funds for public schools
7. "It was so much fun--very invigorating to get out and feel connected to others"
8. "A lot of older people worried about loosing their insurance or social security"

SO you see--the genius of the Women's communist party is that these marches are designed to sweep all into the tent. No serious solutions were debated or even presented. Just everyone going to a fun party and feeling good about having "made a statement".

I marched yesterday and while I'm white and coddled and probably won't be affected by much of what Trump is trying to do, I had to show my support and be with people who feel the same way as I do. Maybe it's selfish reasoning, but I need to know that there are good people in this country. I need to know that minorities are safe and welcome, that people with mental and physical problems (3 of your siblings being some of those people) can get the insurance and help they need without going bankrupt. I worry about the environment and the national parks and polluted waters and animals being trapped, tortured, killed. And I just absolutely despise Donald Trump. He's scary.

I know I don't have a very good argument..."

So for her it was about the feelings.

She also doesn't know what the word insurance means.

I'm somewhat amused at the implication that Trump supporters are not good people. She really isn't that mean or stupid, but she is completely unaware of what she wrote.

If you knew more about our discussions over the years, you might find the bit about being concerned about minorities funny too. Every time she brings something like this up I say, "But you chose to live in Montana, that tells me everything I need to know about what you think of minorities." She gets mad and my brother in law just sits there with sheepish grin on his face.

By the way Bulldog, I wouldn't be paying as much attention to this thread if the Falcons/Packers game were at all interesting.

"But you chose to live in Montana, that tells me everything I need to know about what you think of minorities."

I have two sisters. Oldest sister lives in Nederland, Co. with a 97% white population. Youngest second sister lives in Camden, NJ. (highest crime rate next to Chicago) with an 18% white population. Oldest sister is a Leftist SJW and constantly berates younger sister for being racist. Older sister can't hold a job or a relationship, younger sister married with stable employment going on 20 years.

LOL. I'm watching and multi-tasking, but it's a boring game. I have Pitt/Atl in the SB, so looking forward to the next game.

I'm surprised she says she's white and coddled and won't be affected by....whatever she thinks is going to be affecting anyone. It's like she doesn't know what marches are designed for.

After all, the march was primarily white women. I heard one of the laments from someone I know who went was "there were so very few minority women in attendance."

Well, yeah. They probably work, and probably realize they can improve their lives by earning a buck rather than spending it on feelgood stuff.

Marches are for rich people who want to show their 'concern', feel 'included' and feel like they are 'part of something' because their otherwise sedentary and coddled lifestyle leaves them feeling empty.

Two points about Trumps comments that so many like to interpret as him attacking women:
1. He was having a private conversation between a few guys about the phenomenon of women being attracted to the rich, famous, athletes, movie stars, etc. that of course we all know to be true and how they are so intent of getting next to the guy that they will let him do anything. That's it. "THEY" will "LET" him do anything. Rude, crude talk and everyone of us has done it usually in grade school but many long after. I spent 20 years in the military and crude talk was the norm. It would make Trump look like a prude.
2. I thought that what Ashley Judd said yesterday was disgusting and 100 times worse than anything Trump has said. Think about how easy that disgusting sexual accusation rolled off her tongue as if she has said it or worse many times. That though never even would have occurred to me. Think about that the next time you hear about someone's ex accusing him of inappropriate contact with his children in a divorce dispute. Remember how easy it was for Ms Judd to say whet she said and that she has said it before. Think about it the next time there is a date rape charge and a she said he said trial. Think about how easily Ms Judd accused Trump of the worst thing possible and something no man can ever fully defend himself against. Think about what was on the many signs that many of these women carried. Talk about rude, vulgar and dirty.

My mother always told me when I did something or said something wrong "what would your grandmother say?". My grandmother lived with us my entire childhood and I still shake in my boots at the thought of her wrath. I have to tell you though, I'm not sure Ms Judd's grandmother would disapprove because anymore politeness and human kindness is out and politics comes first. I think Ms Judd is truly evil for what she said.

"...I can't oppose him without being labeled a racist..."
I've heard this from a number of people, & I still can't make head nor tail of it. Why should I care if someone who doesn't know me, and whose opinion matters to me not at all, labels me as something I know myself not to be?
The nattering of imbeciles has never mattered to me, and never will.

You people in NYC need to get out more and meet some real people. I don't know anyone that joined the march at my state capital. In fact, I know several women that would like to give these marchers an earful.

Most of the marchers I saw in the headlines reminded me of Madame Defarge knitting her list of enemies. Bitter with violent undertones.

How do people do that--make an observation about one thing and condemn the context as something else?

On living in Montana: We live here because we love the isolation (most of us do anyhow). That does not mean we are racist it means we like to be more quiet, more thoughtful, more independent. Is that racist? We also live here because we still have the right to protect ourselves and our neighbors--does that make us racist? We live here because up until 3 or 4 years ago we were also free to speak our minds without the fear of losing our jobs--no matter what the issue we had a "live and let live" attitude. Does that make us racist? Sheesh how do you get there from here?

Basically, it comes down to "I want you to agree with me, even if that means me coming up with a lie to shame you into agreeing with me by avoiding the conversation altogether."

This is crucial to the Progressive agenda.

At the march, a friend of mine posted a video of a person covered with orange spray tan, wearing a diaper, with a Trump coiffure, and carrying a Hillary doll. He was whining and crying, and got quite an hysterical reaction from the crowd.

I have to admit his antics made me laugh. It was good theater.

But let's say someone did this for Obama. How would they have responded? Would 'racist' be the first thing out of their mouths? Yes. Unquestionably.

I know because the person who posted it has used that response regularly for anyone opposed to Obama. "your privilege is showing" or "if he were white" or a multitude of other responses.

Understanding why this alienated people can caused them to vote for someone who opposed that kind of nonsense is not interesting to them. Perhaps if it was, the conversation and dialogue which needs to take place, would take place.

An earlier comment stated that the left isn't interested in a conversation. Generally, I'd agree. Many are, though. They are just too afraid to actually have it.

Saturday we did a 10-mile hike with our Scouts. Down the Mudville Trail, across the Golf Course wilderness where the peafowl play, past the mudslide and down to the beach with winter's crashing waves and mist. Then back by secret Gum Tree Woods trails threading through the suburbs. A few moms came along. Rather more pleasant and wide-ranging conversation, and lots of viewpoints to be listened to and pondered. It's pretty cool when a 12-to-17 year old teaches you something new, gives you a new perspective. And all the adults are on their best behavior. Take that, J21'ers!

Bulldog says they are too afraid to have a conversation. No, I'd go further. They've forgotten how. And it's an unstable feedback loop, since it's not worth trying to talk to them, they fall even faster out of practice.

I'll say this. The Tea Party marchers were called unjustly every dirty name in the book, and they cleaned up after themselves. Not so the J21'ers, or so the reports say.

The FAR left? They forgot long ago, they teach their followers to not have any, they aren't interested....etc.

But the FAR right does the same. By saying "it's not worth trying to talk to them" you end a conversation before it even started. I'm not saying you're far right. I'm merely pointing out the far right's views are starting to infect the more moderate positions of the right....just as the same is happening on the left.

It's very important now, more than ever, to not let that happen.

I am having a very good conversation with someone who told me "I've never agreed with you on politics, but I'm surprised we agree so much today."
My response is "We've agreed on far more than you realize. You've just never thought deeply about your position, you've felt I only believed in one way of doing things and assumed I was the polar opposite of you. What you've found, now that your side has lost, is that you need to find a better way to get what you want, and while I'm not a Trump supporter, you see that I am actually having open conversations with Trump supporters and sharing common ground. Because we all have common ground, if we just try to find it."

I agree with your final quote. We are not a charity. Which is why if we dismantle big portions of the welfare state, we'll see there is no reason to build a wall.

1. The "FAR right" (I think) is an ill-defined slur used to identify all those would-be tyrants who are not loyal and subservient to the hegemony of leftist marxian ecumenism. (If it's OK to beat up a fascist in the streets, why is it wrong to beat up a communist?) To my mind, they are the same, they just choose a different set of pretty words. They'll both send all who resist to the arbeit and vernichtung slagers. The FARs will do it, and the moderates will approve or feign ignorance.

2. Seems the LFAR's in the 20Cen have a far better claim to being the champions of ruthless and without scruples extermination.

3. My ruse for encouraging a civil discussion, of prefacing with "Some might say ..." or "A counter to that argument could be ..." is transparent and unwelcome. You must affirm your allegiance to the Body, or Llandru will be called to dispose of you. I forestall that by saying "It's a free country, do what you want. Accept the consequences of your actions. Leave me be and get your hands outta my pockets. If you want to know what I think, watch what I do." I know no lefty who can tolerate a civil discussion, and still think good of me. I can have that discussion with a righty.

4. So I do not have those discussions. I live my life the way think I should. My actions speak for me.

5. Discussing politics unsettles me greatly. It's all people who mean to rule, only the pretty words are different. I am for Liberty. For a government that secures some of our Liberties and otherwise leaves us be. Anathema to both Left and Right. I am resigned to the Long Defeat. Civilization and Liberty are fragile flowers in a springtime desert valley. The arc of history always bends to tyranny.

6. Perhaps I live in a bubble of my own making. From a distance, New York (and its peers) seems to be a town where all have given themselves over to the pretty lies, and no longer are able to distinguish the difference, and no longer care to: the mantric Narrative creates reality. What common ground can there even be? I hope I am wrong, but it is not my experience.

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: